Jump to content


Rhm. Trashwagen.


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

eekeeboo #41 Posted 22 February 2019 - 01:41 PM

    English Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 46047 battles
  • 1,972
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

View PostIgor_BL, on 20 February 2019 - 05:22 PM, said:

 

Please, do not lie to your playerbase.

You call this good? How high skill it is? only for 100% winrate players?

 

And you could also pull that for the batchat. It's not about lying, it's about telling you something you don't want to hear so it's a lie. There's a difference, please learn to distinguish and don't insult me thank-you. 

 

View Postortega456, on 20 February 2019 - 05:43 PM, said:

 

And comments like these are why players might go missing ;)

 

That's their choice as is making the time to be constructive or taking the opportunity to waste everyone's time with finding an opportunity to complain. I'm sure the negativity will not be missed. 

 

View PostJumping_Turtle, on 20 February 2019 - 06:29 PM, said:

 

No, that is the problem with it. It rolls way to easy. Am on my flipping side every three games since every little rock makes it flip on its side.

 

And part of the requirements of the vehicle are to be able to drive it properly and not fail hard with it. There's more to a vehicles skill floor than the gun and the armour ;) 

eekeeboo #42 Posted 22 February 2019 - 01:51 PM

    English Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 46047 battles
  • 1,972
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

View PostSfinski, on 20 February 2019 - 06:37 PM, said:

 

And this will never be answered. WG is blind for facts.

 

It was answered, there's a difference between disagreeing with someone based on facts and agreeing with someone to keep them quiet, i will never do the latter. 

 

View PostHaZardeur, on 20 February 2019 - 06:39 PM, said:

 

You pulled a SerB here eekeeboo... sadly I might add.

 

Game balance is game balance, you can't always have tanks be exactly the same as others, you need a variety in play styles, skill floors and ceilings etc, without it, everything is the same and gets boring fast. 

 

View Postgpalsson, on 20 February 2019 - 06:49 PM, said:

 

No it simply isn't a good vehicle. It doesn't have to do with skill. Yes, good players can do well enough in it. But they still do worse in it than if they were in almost any other vehicle. You see the problem isn't that it's hard to play. Many tanks are like that. The problem is that no matter how good you are it is just not a good tank compared to what else is available.

 

But that's the point a good player can do well in it, that means there's a high skill floor regardless of skill ceiling whereas there are other tanks with low skill floor and high skill ceiling or low skill ceiling. It depends on the tank. There needs to be tanks in the game that good players can say "I made this work" because that's how you encourage variety. Like the example I gave, the batchat and grille are loved by those who can make them work and hated by those who don't know how to or can't make them work. 

 

View PostSfinski, on 20 February 2019 - 06:54 PM, said:

 

Only serb can play it to its full potential and maybe eekeeboo too.

 

// Naw, scratch that. Eekeeboo plays it like rest of us, dealing 2,2k damage with t10 tank. Something that plenty t8s does. And yet, its still balanced.

 

Doesn't matter how i play it, I didn't say it was balanced, it pays to read and reference before making claims ;) 

 

View PostBeltalowda, on 20 February 2019 - 07:06 PM, said:

 

Typical WG answer to anything that is not a Russian tank, if it would be in your favorite Soviet tech tree it would already receive several buffs.

 

The last time WG buffed a Non-Russian tech tree tank was 2 Years ago (23/02/2017). 

 

Updates 9.18 and forward was all and only about overbuffing Russian tanks. So go to hell with your high skill ceiling answers, you know what you are doing and you are doing it on purpose. You're pathetic !

 

.

 

You mean a typical objective answer about balancing and game dynamics, it sure is a shame someone can give you an informed opinion! (Since when did information and education become negative, interesting). 

 

View PostCobra6, on 21 February 2019 - 07:33 AM, said:

 

Come on man, we've all seen the win rate curves of this abomination and it's below the average across the board. Even unicums perform worse in it then pretty much any other light tank (and let's not forget T10 light tanks are winning less matches across the board as well compared to their peer-classes).

 

Cobra 6

 

And you've seen the statements above. It's the same principle as people who say lights are useless all the time, but you have said many times they are just difficult and not easy to master. Now apply that logic here. 

 

View PostDr_Oolen, on 21 February 2019 - 07:54 AM, said:

 

 

I advise you to avoid any Scientific field with your ability to draw conclusions from statements. Please take the time to read again what's been said, then try again. 

 

View Posttajj7, on 21 February 2019 - 10:01 AM, said:

 

It's still not even that good either. I mean take a 140 (which is not even meta) and you can do about 90% of what the T-100 is able to do, whilst being vastly better at other roles. 

 

T-100 lt is the best of a bad bunch, all the tier 10 lights are not very good. 

 

 

Come on eekeeboo, you can't honestly believe that, pretty much every super unicum streamer ever has said that the tank is terrible. 

 

Skill4ltu has 3 marked all of the tier 10 lights, and played nearly 200 battles or more in each of them, the Rhm. has his lowest win rate and average XP, it's over 2% lower in win rate than his next lowest (The Sheridan) and almost 4% lower than his overall win rate. 

 

So even a guy with the most 3 marks out of any player in the game can not get it to work at the same level as other tanks. 

 

 

I do believe it, because there are a lot of tanks with variety, skill floor and ceiling. For example why should the T29 be as good as it is? Could it be the pain you suffer grinding to it and it teaches you a play style? Or why the KV2 should be nerfed on one shot damage potential etc. You need variety in the way tanks demand a skill and ability to play etc, without it, everything is the same and you get the "Copy and paste Russian medium" jibes. 

 

View PostThe_Georgian_One, on 21 February 2019 - 10:11 AM, said:

 

I guess being good at what it does for this vehicle means:

- dragging everybody's overall win rate down

- flipping

- missing targets on the move?

 

Also, if this indeed is high skill floor tank, like batchat, I guess they are equally frequently used in clanwars? Can someone playing this mode confirm please?

 

Pardon my sarcasm, eekeeboo, it's just my sense of humor, no harm intended.

 

That's fine, but that's not it, it's about the skill required to make something work and how it's difficult to play but can perform just as well if not better than other tanks in certain roles. 

 



gpalsson #43 Posted 22 February 2019 - 02:07 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23907 battles
  • 8,732
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 February 2019 - 12:51 PM, said:

 

But that's the point a good player can do well in it, that means there's a high skill floor regardless of skill ceiling whereas there are other tanks with low skill floor and high skill ceiling or low skill ceiling. It depends on the tank. There needs to be tanks in the game that good players can say "I made this work" because that's how you encourage variety. Like the example I gave, the batchat and grille are loved by those who can make them work and hated by those who don't know how to or can't make them work. 

 

 

No, that's not how it is.

You can't compare the them because good players can make BC25t work. Yes, they can in fact surpass performance in other tanks that may be easier to drive but have lower potential, because they can use the strengths of the tank to overcome the bad ones. But that is because eg. BC25T actually HAS some strong points that are worth exploiting.

 

My entire point is that it is not possible to surpass the performance of other tanks in this particular tank because all other LTs are just flat out better. The Rhm is the worst. It doesn't matter how good you are, you won't have better performance in it compared to other TX LTs than you do in the others all other things like crew being equal. So you may find one or two players who does for some odd reason have better performance in them than other TX LT's, but I can assure you it doesn't have to do with skill floor.


Edited by gpalsson, 22 February 2019 - 02:13 PM.


truoste #44 Posted 22 February 2019 - 02:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39978 battles
  • 1,406
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View Postgpalsson, on 22 February 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

No, that's not how it is.

You can't compare the them because good players can make BC25t work. Yes, they can in fact surpass performance in other tanks that may be easier to drive but have lower potential, because they can use the strengths of the tank to overcome the bad ones. But that is because eg. BC25T actually HAS some strong points that are worth exploiting.

 

My entire point is that it is not possible to surpass the performance of other tanks in this particular tank because all other LTs are just flat out better. The Rhm is the worst. It doesn't matter how good you are, you won't have better performance in it compared to other TX LTs than you do in the others all other things like crew being equal. So you may find one or two players who does for some odd reason have better performance in them than other TX LT's, but I can assure you it doesn't have to do with skill floor.

 

I think what eekeeboo is trying to say is that it is really really bad tank but they have done some extensive datamining and found A player that has slightly better stats in trashwagon than in sheridan hence it is balanced and just has very very high skill floor. It does not really make any sense to claim that the tank has high skill floor when on average every one performs significantly worse in it than in any other tank but WG also claims that leo1 is borderline op and Type5 is hard to play etc. so does it really surprise that they have sort of different view about what is skill and what is balance.

 

At the end of the day, trashwagon is a bad tank that no one should touch but if someone is really really bored, they can have the "challenge". Everyone wins I quess, expect the team that has the privilege to end up with trashwagon against lt100 in the enemyteam. 



Igor_BL #45 Posted 22 February 2019 - 02:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42303 battles
  • 1,558
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 February 2019 - 01:41 PM, said:

 

And you could also pull that for the batchat. It's not about lying, it's about telling you something you don't want to hear so it's a lie. There's a difference, please learn to distinguish and don't insult me thank-you. 

 

 

You are insulting us, by claiming RHM is fine as it is. And it is the same type of "high ceiling" tank, like the batcat.
So, please, stop insulting your players, by writing nonsenses like that. Thank-you!

P.S. you requested it... Do you see the difference? Any? I might be civ. eng. and a mathematician, numbers are my thing, but I dont think those two graphs are hard to differ.

14:02 Added after 5 minutes
also, what is this?!!?

"I advise you to avoid any Scientific field with your ability to draw conclusions from statements. Please take the time to read again what's been said, then try again. "

You talk to forumite and player like that? as forum CC/moderator or whatever?

peregrine #46 Posted 22 February 2019 - 03:07 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 58561 battles
  • 107
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    10-17-2011

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 February 2019 - 01:41 PM, said:

And you could also pull that for the batchat. It's not about lying, it's about telling you something you don't want to hear so it's a lie. There's a difference, please learn to distinguish and don't insult me thank-you. 

 

 

Please enlighten us where exactly the rhm does what is expected to do? There is not a single data point where the winrate is within 4% of the expected values. Again, someone playing the rhm wins 4% less battles than in the "average" tank. No one can make the tank work. That is the definition of a underpowered tank.

 

Since you brought up the bc25t, recent results show that the tank is not as good as it used to be. So meta changes would require to buff the tank.

 

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 February 2019 - 01:51 PM, said:

I advise you to avoid any Scientific field with your ability to draw conclusions from statements. Please take the time to read again what's been said, then try again. 

 

I am not sure you should be making such statements given your conclusions from reading a simple diagram.



Igor_BL #47 Posted 22 February 2019 - 03:11 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42303 battles
  • 1,558
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

View Postperegrine, on 22 February 2019 - 03:07 PM, said:

 

 

 

I am not sure you should be making such statements given your conclusions from reading a simple diagram.

 

agree

geoff99 #48 Posted 22 February 2019 - 03:24 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 40337 battles
  • 269
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    09-20-2012

Has someone hacked Eek's account?

 

Normally he's friendly, responsive, constructive and open about WG's strengths and failings. Great attributes for a forum mod.

 

Defending the Rhm Pzw is madness though. Clearly its complete cack. Saying that its not just annoys people and loses trust.



Solstad1069 #49 Posted 22 February 2019 - 04:14 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 41844 battles
  • 3,329
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013
I hear you eekeeboo, but why does any tank get buffed when you can just call them high skill tank.

Sfinski #50 Posted 22 February 2019 - 04:36 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 3,066
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 February 2019 - 02:51 PM, said:

Doesn't matter how i play it, I didn't say it was balanced, it pays to read and reference before making claims ;) 

 

So you admit it's not balanced.*edited* . If it's not balanced, it is not fine. No matter how specialized it is.

 

 


Edited by G_Bg_82, 23 February 2019 - 10:40 AM.
edited due to not constructive content


tajj7 #51 Posted 22 February 2019 - 04:41 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 26732 battles
  • 14,427
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostSolstad1069, on 22 February 2019 - 03:14 PM, said:

I hear you eekeeboo,

 

I'm not hearing him, I really don't get what he is trying to say here.

 

The tank is a high skill floor tank, we all get that, any paper tank that relies more on mobility, camo, vision, DPM than alpha, hp and armour is going to be harder to play and harder to do well in.

 

But this is a high skill floor tank with no high potential, people who are top 0.1% of players, probably top 0.01% cannot get this tank to perform at the same levels as even their other tier 10 lights (let alone other more competitive tier 10s) which to me very clearly says underpowered tank.

 

Even if you play this to perfection, to the highest level of play possible, you are still going to be better of in other tanks. 

 

Also if you just leave aside the statistics that clearly show it to be very poor, just doing a logical assessment of its attributes in comparison to other tanks on tier 10 shows it to not be very good. It is a large, very paper tank with poor penetration, poor alpha, poor DPM, and so so gun handling.  That is not a good combination for a successful tank in the current meta. 



Isharial #52 Posted 22 February 2019 - 04:59 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 21670 battles
  • 2,532
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View Posttajj7, on 22 February 2019 - 04:41 PM, said:

 

I'm not hearing him, I really don't get what he is trying to say here.

 

The tank is a high skill floor tank, we all get that, any paper tank that relies more on mobility, camo, vision, DPM than alpha, hp and armour is going to be harder to play and harder to do well in.

 

But this is a high skill floor tank with no high potential, people who are top 0.1% of players, probably top 0.01% cannot get this tank to perform at the same levels as even their other tier 10 lights (let alone other more competitive tier 10s) which to me very clearly says underpowered tank.

 

Even if you play this to perfection, to the highest level of play possible, you are still going to be better of in other tanks. 

 

Also if you just leave aside the statistics that clearly show it to be very poor, just doing a logical assessment of its attributes in comparison to other tanks on tier 10 shows it to not be very good. It is a large, very paper tank with poor penetration, poor alpha, poor DPM, and so so gun handling.  That is not a good combination for a successful tank in the current meta. 

 

at the end of the day, what eekeeboo says is kinda true.. 

 

you do need variety, and not every tank can be balanced when you have quite a few of them on the same tier or more... specially when it comes to mediums... how many T9 mediums are there? and every single one of them must have a "special" point... the RhM is one of those jack of all trades but master of none type tanks, which is why it is technically balanced but still as everyone else says "your better off in something else"

 

those other tanks, like the Sheridan, are 1 trick ponies (so to speak).. they crap at everything but have 1 great thing that good players can utilise.. the rhm doesn't, so there's nothing to fall back on.. ie, it seems like crap, but in reality, its not, it just doesn't have a major strength

 

if we gave it a core strength, what stops it powercreeping another light, so now its something else that needs some love... the cycle never ends

 

same goes for every other class and tank.. there's always 1 tank that will be statistically the worst, but that doesn't make it a bad, completely unbalanced tank in terms of its actual parameters. basically if it doesn't have "best in class" *insert whatever stat you want* it hasn't got anything to fall back on, and therefore majority of players will call it a Pos



fwhaatpiraat #53 Posted 22 February 2019 - 05:44 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 51775 battles
  • 1,058
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostIsharial, on 22 February 2019 - 04:59 PM, said:

 

at the end of the day, what eekeeboo says is kinda true.. 

 

you do need variety, and not every tank can be balanced when you have quite a few of them on the same tier or more... specially when it comes to mediums... how many T9 mediums are there? and every single one of them must have a "special" point... the RhM is one of those jack of all trades but master of none type tanks, which is why it is technically balanced but still as everyone else says "your better off in something else"

 

those other tanks, like the Sheridan, are 1 trick ponies (so to speak).. they crap at everything but have 1 great thing that good players can utilise.. the rhm doesn't, so there's nothing to fall back on.. ie, it seems like crap, but in reality, its not, it just doesn't have a major strength

 

if we gave it a core strength, what stops it powercreeping another light, so now its something else that needs some love... the cycle never ends

 

same goes for every other class and tank.. there's always 1 tank that will be statistically the worst, but that doesn't make it a bad, completely unbalanced tank in terms of its actual parameters. basically if it doesn't have "best in class" *insert whatever stat you want* it hasn't got anything to fall back on, and therefore majority of players will call it a Pos

 

Sorry, but you are wrong on so many aspects. You start with a good point, ofcourse it would be dull if many tanks had the exact same parameters. The 'jack of all trades, master of none' vs 'one-trick-ponies' does make sense in theory, but not if it gets implemented as 'master of all trades, jack of none'. The RHM PZW has no relevant strengths. It's spotting capabilities are mediocre because of its size and sluggish mobility (turning speed). That means it is really easy to counter, either by just shooting the rhm pzw when it is making a spotting run (it is higher than an Obj277, boxy and has no armor, you do the math), or by blind firing at positions like on Malinovka, Redshire or Prokhorovka. The tank is not stealthy to get and when driving around it basically says: "shoot here for easy damage". It's combat parameters are even worse, far worse actually. With a reload of 7.5s (with BiA, gun rammer and vents) it has a worse reload than all NATO meds (and ofcourse all 320 alpha RU meds). That is not a good starting point already, add worse penetration, far worse penetration drop off (194mm penetration on 500meters, 60 meters less than the mentioned meds), 0.35 base accuracy with so so bloom statistics, 20% worse shell velocity (with standard round, with HEAT or HE it is even worse), no clip (which many fast tanks have) and a 280mm heat round, and you should have an idea how the 320 alpha gun performs. If you think that is not a problem since you 'should not snipe the fronts of heavy tanks', it is. Since 1) you will face a lot of heavily armored vehicles frontally. Doing nothing means you're useless, which makes it more likely to lose. 2) You cannot flank them at the start of the game, the fastest way to get rekt is to flank them at the early stages of the game. 3) Even during flanking, the parameters of gun handling, penetration values and dpm are really important, if you have to snap shot the side of an IS-7, Type 5, WZ-5a, etc, you are quite likely to 'ding'. Also the traverse speed (worse than a 907 or Leopard, but better than a Batchat or Centurion) will make you suffer if you quickly want to retreat or try to get some nice shooting angles.

 

This has nothing to do with a jack of all trades. This is just a tank with really mediocre statistics on basically every aspect, while there are tanks around that score much higher on basically all aspects. For instance the 907 or 260. Good luck fighting such 'master of all'  tanks.



Igor_BL #54 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:15 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42303 battles
  • 1,558
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015
I just cant believe what am I reading. That is it.
This time I am finished with the forum. There is no point. If guys like eekeeboo are in charge for something, telling us "RHM is good as it is now" and similar nonsenses, there is no feedback that can change it. And with Gepard's recent recognition that they dont value our feedback, they have their "way".
I will let them to live in their world, where it is ok to implement 268v4, where you need 2-3 years to buff 260, to nerf e5, where is4, leo1 and similar tanks are still on the list, becase "data is being collected"...

I would love this game to have a long "life", but i doubt it. See ya guys on battlefield.
Cheers.

eekeeboo #55 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:21 PM

    English Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 46047 battles
  • 1,972
  • Member since:
    07-25-2010

View PostIgor_BL, on 22 February 2019 - 01:56 PM, said:

 

You are insulting us, by claiming RHM is fine as it is. And it is the same type of "high ceiling" tank, like the batcat.
So, please, stop insulting your players, by writing nonsenses like that. Thank-you!

P.S. you requested it... Do you see the difference? Any? I might be civ. eng. and a mathematician, numbers are my thing, but I dont think those two graphs are hard to differ.

14:02 Added after 5 minutes
also, what is this?!!?

"I advise you to avoid any Scientific field with your ability to draw conclusions from statements. Please take the time to read again what's been said, then try again. "

You talk to forumite and player like that? as forum CC/moderator or whatever?

 

Yes I do, I'm not here to mollycoddle you, I'm here to present you the facts, whether you like them or not. You can deal with it, or you can go elsewhere, these are your choices. Just like the rules. 

 

View Postgpalsson, on 22 February 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

No, that's not how it is.

You can't compare the them because good players can make BC25t work. Yes, they can in fact surpass performance in other tanks that may be easier to drive but have lower potential, because they can use the strengths of the tank to overcome the bad ones. But that is because eg. BC25T actually HAS some strong points that are worth exploiting.

 

My entire point is that it is not possible to surpass the performance of other tanks in this particular tank because all other LTs are just flat out better. The Rhm is the worst. It doesn't matter how good you are, you won't have better performance in it compared to other TX LTs than you do in the others all other things like crew being equal. So you may find one or two players who does for some odd reason have better performance in them than other TX LT's, but I can assure you it doesn't have to do with skill floor.

 

And that is a fair point, but that's how it is. Not all tanks need to have a low skill floor, not all tanks need to be easy to play or perform the same way. And like the German Light TX does have some strengths, but they're harder to get to shine, most players don't like trying to shine in lights because they feel more versatile in mediums. You're encroaching on a very different aspect of the tanks performance from damage dealing to mostly supporting and spotting. 

 

View Postperegrine, on 22 February 2019 - 02:07 PM, said:

 

 

Please enlighten us where exactly the rhm does what is expected to do? There is not a single data point where the winrate is within 4% of the expected values. Again, someone playing the rhm wins 4% less battles than in the "average" tank. No one can make the tank work. That is the definition of a underpowered tank.

 

Since you brought up the bc25t, recent results show that the tank is not as good as it used to be. So meta changes would require to buff the tank.

 

 

I am not sure you should be making such statements given your conclusions from reading a simple diagram.

 

"On average" you missed this from your post. Add that and you will see what happens with the graph. Just because I don't look at a line and go, that's infallible must be right, anyone who disagrees is wrong, doesn't mean I can't read graphs or data. If you read above, not all tanks have to be a certain perspective on ease of play, that's not how you make games varied. 

 

View Postgeoff99, on 22 February 2019 - 02:24 PM, said:

Has someone hacked Eek's account?

 

Normally he's friendly, responsive, constructive and open about WG's strengths and failings. Great attributes for a forum mod.

 

Defending the Rhm Pzw is madness though. Clearly its complete cack. Saying that its not just annoys people and loses trust.

 

That's once again, I give honest facts, not molly coddle. The fact is a game needs a variety of play style and skill floor/ceiling mechanics. This is something that's a fact. You have in any game that has variety and length mechanics and classes with high skill floor and high skill ceiling rated all the way down to low skill floor and low skill ceiling with variable output from each. This is why you have hatred for low skill floor arty and type 5 etc, but you have respect for high skill ceiling with good light players. People look at the skill floor of something and judge it there but never look at the skill ceiling in 90% (arbritrary number) of cases. 

 

View PostSolstad1069, on 22 February 2019 - 03:14 PM, said:

I hear you eekeeboo, but why does any tank get buffed when you can just call them high skill tank.

 

Sometimes this comes down to a tank not being played at all or below averages in which case it does get reviewed, but it's why balancing takes a while to make sure you don't nerf the wrong tanks (like T29) and you buff the right tanks (like the Tiger 2). You have to look at the tanks leading up to it and the experience you have, if you go purely on performance you start massively affecting all the tanks around it. This is one of the reasons i mention that balancing is more complex than simply making it like the other tanks at the tier, because you need to look at so much more. 

 

View PostSfinski, on 22 February 2019 - 03:36 PM, said:

 

So you admit it's not balanced. *edited* If it's not balanced, it is not fine. No matter how specialized it is.

 

 

 

I admit it's difficult to play, I admit it's got a high skill floor. That means the tank can perform in a game, this means it's balanced in the right hands (like any tank). And that's what you need in a game you can't just have basic easy to play and perform tanks anywhere, no skilled player can distinguish themself and there stops being challenge. This is fundamental PvP game design and if you want to keep a game engaging for a variety of skilled demographics. 

 

View Posttajj7, on 22 February 2019 - 03:41 PM, said:

 

I'm not hearing him, I really don't get what he is trying to say here.

 

The tank is a high skill floor tank, we all get that, any paper tank that relies more on mobility, camo, vision, DPM than alpha, hp and armour is going to be harder to play and harder to do well in.

 

But this is a high skill floor tank with no high potential, people who are top 0.1% of players, probably top 0.01% cannot get this tank to perform at the same levels as even their other tier 10 lights (let alone other more competitive tier 10s) which to me very clearly says underpowered tank.

 

Even if you play this to perfection, to the highest level of play possible, you are still going to be better of in other tanks. 

 

Also if you just leave aside the statistics that clearly show it to be very poor, just doing a logical assessment of its attributes in comparison to other tanks on tier 10 shows it to not be very good. It is a large, very paper tank with poor penetration, poor alpha, poor DPM, and so so gun handling.  That is not a good combination for a successful tank in the current meta. 

 

And I'm saying that you can be on par with this vehicle as other tanks if you know how to use it. The problem with those graphs is they rely heavily on averages, now you start doing that and like when you get a new tank and people free xp to it, the skill performance is higher than when the average player will reach it when the spike disappears. Not all tanks need to be easy to play if you want to have challenge in the game and not all tanks need to be difficult to play, but it's important to have variety. 

 

View Postfwhaatpiraat, on 22 February 2019 - 04:44 PM, said:

 

Sorry, but you are wrong on so many aspects. You start with a good point, ofcourse it would be dull if many tanks had the exact same parameters. The 'jack of all trades, master of none' vs 'one-trick-ponies' does make sense in theory, but not if it gets implemented as 'master of all trades, jack of none'. The RHM PZW has no relevant strengths. It's spotting capabilities are mediocre because of its size and sluggish mobility (turning speed). That means it is really easy to counter, either by just shooting the rhm pzw when it is making a spotting run (it is higher than an Obj277, boxy and has no armor, you do the math), or by blind firing at positions like on Malinovka, Redshire or Prokhorovka. The tank is not stealthy to get and when driving around it basically says: "shoot here for easy damage". It's combat parameters are even worse, far worse actually. With a reload of 7.5s (with BiA, gun rammer and vents) it has a worse reload than all NATO meds (and ofcourse all 320 alpha RU meds). That is not a good starting point already, add worse penetration, far worse penetration drop off (194mm penetration on 500meters, 60 meters less than the mentioned meds), 0.35 base accuracy with so so bloom statistics, 20% worse shell velocity (with standard round, with HEAT or HE it is even worse), no clip (which many fast tanks have) and a 280mm heat round, and you should have an idea how the 320 alpha gun performs. If you think that is not a problem since you 'should not snipe the fronts of heavy tanks', it is. Since 1) you will face a lot of heavily armored vehicles frontally. Doing nothing means you're useless, which makes it more likely to lose. 2) You cannot flank them at the start of the game, the fastest way to get rekt is to flank them at the early stages of the game. 3) Even during flanking, the parameters of gun handling, penetration values and dpm are really important, if you have to snap shot the side of an IS-7, Type 5, WZ-5a, etc, you are quite likely to 'ding'. Also the traverse speed (worse than a 907 or Leopard, but better than a Batchat or Centurion) will make you suffer if you quickly want to retreat or try to get some nice shooting angles.

 

This has nothing to do with a jack of all trades. This is just a tank with really mediocre statistics on basically every aspect, while there are tanks around that score much higher on basically all aspects. For instance the 907 or 260. Good luck fighting such 'master of all'  tanks.

 

​Not if you want to give variety in your game, what the person says above you is a fundamental to keep things in the game to be different and cater to different skill levels. Otherwise you'd never have a strong vehicle or a "nice" vehicle to play because they're OP thus they nee to be nerfed and balanced. 

 

18:23 Added after 1 minute

View PostIgor_BL, on 22 February 2019 - 06:15 PM, said:

I just cant believe what am I reading. That is it.
This time I am finished with the forum. There is no point. If guys like eekeeboo are in charge for something, telling us "RHM is good as it is now" and similar nonsenses, there is no feedback that can change it. And with Gepard's recent recognition that they dont value our feedback, they have their "way".
I will let them to live in their world, where it is ok to implement 268v4, where you need 2-3 years to buff 260, to nerf e5, where is4, leo1 and similar tanks are still on the list, becase "data is being collected"...

I would love this game to have a long "life", but i doubt it. See ya guys on battlefield.
Cheers.

 

And that's your choice, but this balancing system has been in the game and many other games for PvP for years, and you can see how long it's running vs other tank games with "more even balance" and look how that went because there's no challenge and no variety. Like it or not, it's how fact of game design works. 

Edited by G_Bg_82, 23 February 2019 - 10:43 AM.


Sfinski #56 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:39 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 3,066
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

eekeeboo, you have not presented any facts. None. Only your biased opinion. The grafs you see ARE the facts and they prove you wrong. Variety can be breought without imbalance. There's already tanks in the game that are played completely differently, but perform at the same level. Game does NOT need OP and UP tanks to make it varied.

-----------------

No-one is talking every tank should be same level of ease to play, just that every tank should be balanced. How are you failing to understand such a simple thing?

-----------------

Rhm is hard to play and there is no hands that could play it same level than they could play a balanced tank. Not a single player. Nada. So again, lies that have been proven wrong already, yet you keep repeating them for some reason.

-----------------

WG has proven multiple times that they have no idea how to balance the game. For all the things they've done right they've f'ed up 10 other things over. The balance has gotten only worse and worse every year.

-----------------

It is not fact how game design works, there's plenty of games that prove that wrong, it's just either incompetence or ignorance on behalf of WG that ruins the balance over and over again.

 

 

 



peregrine #57 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:40 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 58561 battles
  • 107
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    10-17-2011

View Posteekeeboo, on 22 February 2019 - 07:21 PM, said:

"On average" you missed this from your post. Add that and you will see what happens with the graph. Just because I don't look at a line and go, that's infallible must be right, anyone who disagrees is wrong, doesn't mean I can't read graphs or data. If you read above, not all tanks have to be a certain perspective on ease of play, that's not how you make games varied. 

It's amazing that you keep showing that you have no clue what you are talking about.



MeNoobTank #58 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:56 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14209 battles
  • 743
  • [GT_WC] GT_WC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2017

I understand what eekeeboo try to point out and it is indeed true but that does not mean that Rhm is a balanced Light tank.

 

He says that you see on the graph that the tank is bad because the avarage player struggle to make it work, this is his point and I think I understand it clear. This indeed can mean that there are very few pro players that can make it work but it does not prove his point that the tank is balanced, this is pure nonsense to say. If you could check those pro players that master this tank, you could also see that they still have way better stats in other tanks that are indeed balanced.

 

Also he says that Tiger II is actually balanced too but hard to play but because alot of players do not want to play it anymore they plan to buff it. This is what I understand from that post, maybe I am wrong but that result from his statement.



Isharial #59 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:57 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 21670 battles
  • 2,532
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View Postfwhaatpiraat, on 22 February 2019 - 05:44 PM, said:

 

 

 

This has nothing to do with a jack of all trades. This is just a tank with really mediocre statistics on basically every aspect, while there are tanks around that score much higher on basically all aspects. For instance the 907 or 260. Good luck fighting such 'master of all'  tanks.

 

is that a problem with the RhM or a problem with the other tanks you mention? 907 is known to be broken as is... are we balancing tanks to broken ones or the wider game?

 

at what point do we say "that's as far as we can buff them"?

 

it is after all, a light tank, and if it has better gun stats, then that makes the previous #1 choice for gun stats now inferior to the RhM. by all means, if its performing so terribly, buff it, but can you buff it without taking another light tanks place? you buff one thing, and you make another tank redundant instead.

 

I don't want to see WG buff 1 tank, and put another in the RhM's place, as that has achieved nothing.

 

 

EDIT: will add that the gun performs better (stat wise) than the 132-1, as well as having the highest base view range of all lights (shared with the Sheridan) which also "suffers" with the same heat round as well 

- Compared to that tank, the only thing the rhm loses out on is 70 alpha damage, terrain resistance, and turret traverse bloom.... 

 

if Tanks.gg is anything to go by, that doesn't seem like a whole lot worse to make it a tank issue?

 

EDIT2: fixed some typo's

 


Edited by Isharial, 22 February 2019 - 08:12 PM.


Sfinski #60 Posted 22 February 2019 - 07:59 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 33809 battles
  • 3,066
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

View PostMeNoobTank, on 22 February 2019 - 08:56 PM, said:

I understand what eekeeboo try to point out and it is indeed true but that does not mean that Rhm is a balanced Light tank.

 

He says that you see on the graph that the tank is bad because the avarage player struggle to make it work, this is his point and I think I understand it clear. This indeed can mean that there are very few pro players that can make it work but it does not prove his point that the tank is balanced, this is pure nonsense to say. If you could check those pro players that master this tank, you could also see that they still have way better stats in other tanks that are indeed balanced.

 

Also he says that Tiger II is actually balanced too but hard to play but because alot of players do not want to play it anymore they plan to buff it. This is what I understand from that post, maybe I am wrong but that result from his statement.

 

No, the graph shows every player from every skill levels.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users